Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1887-02-05
RAILROAD LEGISLATION WHAT
SHALL 1T BE2

SHALL IL q
"rhe general assembly should give
Is some good, strong railroad legisla-
Probably not another remark regard
ny the duty of the present legislature
8 SO often heard as this.
There Is hardly room for doubt that
his sentiment is entertained by ninety
Der cent. of the citizens of the state
Who have thought of the matter at all;
md, despite the hypercritical RAM OF a
iyspectic newspaper or two, it is very
that the members of the legis-
Iature are earnestly desirous of giving
% the state the very best laws that they
,an devise upon the subject.
Still, there are difficulties in the
way. To determine that legislation ia
is not a suggestion OF what
the legislation should be.
In many sessions of our legislature
there are go many jealousies between
the senate and the house, and between
the authors of bills, that it becomes
to reconcile conflicting
views until adjournment comes to quiet
contentious by killing all the proposed
measures. Fortunately the members
of the present general assembly come
to their duties impressed with the fact
that the people demand at their hands
the very best attainable results. The
committees OF both the senate and
house have been we'll chosen, and
while some of the members are authors
of bills none of them appears to be so
tenacious of his views as to make OF
them a sine qua n0n to any action.
AS q result, the two committees and the
individual members, with probably
one or two exceptions, are co-opera-
ting to mature out of the ten or twelve
bills before them one upon which they
can all agree. With this object the
Joint committee OF the two houses met
in the senate chamber, last Monday
aud Tuesday afternoon and night, to
hear arguments on railroad legislation,
first from the side of the public, and,
second, from that of the railroads.
The discussion and collateral in
formation reveal the fact that the usual
emergency of opinions exists. Not
to speak of details there are radical diff
ferences which must be r%econciled be-
fore anything can be concluded; these
appertsiu to constitutional require
ments aud limitations, and may be
summed up:
a. The view that the constitution
requires the legislature to fix maximum
rates of charges for passengers and
treights. And
o. The view that the legislature
may delegate this power to the rail
road commissioners Of the state.
The first view is supported by {
strict construction of section IA, article
XII, of the state constitution which
says:-"The general assembly shallp44I
laws to correct abuses and pse1014Mu.
Just determinations and lS46lGt6il FIJI
the rates of treiektssegfpSAsnge
tariffs on thsaa1 lflf9edssm tn,
state; 81 ssot'me, pas
lssces S1SSSSasona6le mazinu"
3s1eetfo r the transportation O.
v 6nd freight on said railroads
ee7tforce all such la0s by adequat
penalties" 1t is argued that under thi
clause of the constitution the Legislature
must itself fix the maximum rates, ant
that it cannot delegate the power dele
gated to it by the organic law. Thi
idea is held by two classes of persons
those who primarily base their reason
Ing upon the literal words of the con
stitution; and those who in reality d
not wish to trust the railroad commits
sioners to fix the rates.
The second view is entertained b
persons who hold that the intent of th
constitution Is to regulate the rates G
freight, and that if it shall prove im
practicable for the general assembly
enter into the minute details of scheC
ules of freight rates over all the road
that the courts would sustain the dele
CATION of sufficient power to the raj
way commission to carry out the rel
object Of the constitutional convention
that if ssto correct abuses" it is necesl
airy to delegate certain powers to a
officer created for the purpose by th
statute, it would be as manifest q vi,
lation of the constitution to neglect
do..so as it would be to neglect obedien'
to the subsequent clause in the san
paragraph which commands the pas
age of laws to establish reasonab
3 maximum rates, etc. Further, the
+ persons say, the constitution command
the general assembly 10 "pass laws q
tablishing reasonable maximum rat
o of charges" etc., and they claim, |
passing a law which provides for Il
fixing Of rates by the commission, tn
the requirement is substantially col
y piled with.
l. These are the two extreme views.
1t is en- axiom that all legislation
;. compromise, and in this case it seen
= not only that it must be so to reconc
differences of opinion as to details, b
i that it is even more necessary in ord
to harmonic the requirements of
constitution with the necessities of le
-, islation.
Experience has proven that 1t 10 q
solutely impossible for the legislstr
to effectively fix maximum rates
freight. if this is done by a unifor
:; tsriff throughout the state the rate Il
le will be just to a road running throu
a sparsely settled country, with lit
freight aud few passengers, will be
ID tirely too great for another road VIII
these conditions are reversed. 7
f. consequence will be that the effort
r. to be unfair to any railroad will res
in q practical removal of RESTRICT,
,s from those roads which do the !are
RI business. Ii it is done by making s
.. arate schedules of rates for each n
N upon every article, and the shipper
one article be it ever SO little has
q. much right to be protected as the 81
-, per OF another be it aver so big then